Skip to comments.Associated Press: Fair Use Limits You To Four Words; Five Words Costs $12.50
Posted on 06/17/2008 12:33:32 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
As we wait with bated breath for the Associated Press to come down from the mountain with its own rules for "fair use for bloggers," Patrick Nielsen Hayden gives us a sense of what the AP considers fair use (found via Boing Boing). Apparently, for quite some time, the AP has had up a page that lists out prices for quoting AP text. I will quote the list prices, and hope I don't get a DMCA takedown:
Oh, and it gets better. The AP claims that it can revoke the license at any time if it feels you're saying something negative about the Associated Press: "Publisher reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time if Publisher or its agents finds Your use of the licensed Content to be offensive and/or damaging to Publishers reputation."
Now, these are the terms that the AP has had on its site for some time -- but they explain why the AP went after the Drudge Retort for quoting less than 100 words. To the AP, that was a violation requiring a $25 license. So, while some believe that those criticizing the AP are overreacting, I'd argue that's not the case at all. This is not, as suggested, a one-time thing. This is an ongoing pattern of misuse of copyright law by the AP. And it's been pointed out to the AP in the past that these actions are wrong -- and it did nothing to change the AP's behavior. Instead, it seems to have only emboldened the AP.
Besides, it now appears that the AP's way of having this "conversation" with bloggers on what is AP-acceptable "fair use" is to meet with some guy who represents some blogging "group" I've never heard of. That group does not represent bloggers and it certainly doesn't speak for all of us in reaching some sort of "agreement." If the AP really wants to engage with the critics, why doesn't it come out and talk to those of us criticizing its actions? So far, the only engagement has been to cut and past the same comment on a bunch of blog sites... Other than that, it has only spoken to reporters about this issue.
Yep. They are slowly fading into history anyways. This will just speed up the process.
The trouble with boycotting them is they sometimes publish stiff that calls out for a Barf Alert or lesser level of criticism and it can only be done if we quote them.
Once you pay them you will be bound by the full terms of the AP contract and fair use won’t apply.
If so, I can see AP make it a backroom policy to make all articles over four words so they can go after everyone who even links to articles as some sort of money making scam.
WOO HOOOO!! I always wanted to do that to you.ggg
Hope you are well.
Is that a price per incident?
It’s a moot point. It’s the AP that is in violation of US Copyright Law.
They will lose the first lawsuit, guaranteed.
I’ve been reading around and a lot of bloggers are finding ways around this including: Putting_underscores_between_each_word_to_claim_they_are only posting one continuous word. Puttingeverythinginmetatags so they can claim they are not posting the article but metatags of the article.
Just checking... Actually, I go along with the "Boycott AP!" idea...
Well, I’m not going to play their games. I’m going to ban AP from FR. If you want to report on something they publish you can always say, “According to the Associated Press, blah, blah, blah,” without using their titles or any actual quotes. Critiquing or reporting on published articles still falls within commonly accepted fair use standards. AP can shove their liberal propaganda and their censorship attempts where the sun don’t shine.
Everytime the AP puts out a biased strory, I call the editors of two local papers who don’t have DC based staff.
All I need is 3 words for AP and first word is Go.
Except....except...we boycott steenkin’ AP, and we are left with quoting steenkin’ Reuters, even more biased and puanteur AFP, est bien plus décentré. I have to say, though, the idea of spanking AP is appealing.
I might like this fair use....
Associated Press... is... gay.
There. 4 word excerpt. Very accurate. No charge.
They are taking a page from RIAA which tried to retroactively charge Internet radio stations for songs those stations played during the previous 6 months.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.